Search:
Computing and Library Services - delivering an inspiring information environment

Creativity, Scenographers and the Director – Facilitator or Smotherer? - A Case Study from a Regional Rep Theatre

Watkins, Meic (2015) Creativity, Scenographers and the Director – Facilitator or Smotherer? - A Case Study from a Regional Rep Theatre. In: Theatre and Performance Conference 2015, 19th and 20th June 2015, University of Central Lancashire, UK.

[img]
Preview
PDF - Presentation
Download (125kB) | Preview
[img] Microsoft Word - Presentation
Restricted to Repository staff only

Download (38kB)

Abstract

In theatre we make little attempt to define or study creativity, yet we often demand it of our students. It is hard to define but we owe them a duty to clarify what we mean. My studies examine creativity as a phenomenon embedded in a particular culture - in theatre, the culture of the ‘company’ and the interrelationships within it. This paper looks at what the (somewhat scant) literature perceives the director/scenographer relationship to be and then focuses in on one production at the Oldham Coliseum, using ethnographic techniques: observations of design meetings; interviews with the scenographers and director; and the production itself. Its conclusions reinforce the importance of the director–scenographer relationship as a major factor in the manifestation of scenographic creativity but find that in a ‘traditional’ rep there can be a real relationship of differently-skilled equals, and asks is this better for all? And if so, how can we train our scenography (and directing) students to develop that relationship?

Item Type: Conference or Workshop Item (Paper)
Contributors:
ContributionNameEmailORCID
AuthorWatkins, Meicm.k.watkins@hud.ac.ukUNSPECIFIED
Subjects: H Social Sciences > H Social Sciences (General)
Schools: School of Music, Humanities and Media
Related URLs:
References:

Cropley, D.H. & Cropley, A.J., 2010. Functional Creativity: Products and the generation of effective novelty. Cambridge Handbook of Creativity, pp.301–320.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., 1996. Creativity 1st Harper Perennial Ed., HarperCollins.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., 1999. Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. Handbook of Creativity pp313-335
Gardner, H., 1994. Creating Minds: An Anatomy of Creativity Seen Through the Lives of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham and Gandhi Reprint., Basic Books.
Glaveanu, V.P., 2010. Paradigms in the study of creativity: Introducing the perspective of cultural psychology. New ideas in psychology, 28(1), pp.79–93.
Hartnoll, P. ed., 1972. Concise Oxford Companion to the Theatre Concise ed edition., London, New York: Oxford Paperbacks.
Kaufman, J.C. & Beghetto, R.A., 2009. Beyond big and little: The four c model of creativity. Review of General Psychology; Review of General Psychology, 13(1), p.1. Available at: http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/gpr/13/1/1/ [Accessed February 10, 2013].
National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education, 1999. All Our Futures.
Richards, R., 2010. Everyday Creativity: Process and Way of Life—Four Key Issues, Cambridge Handbook of Creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press.
White, C., 2009. Directors and Designers, Bristol, GBR: Intellect Ltd.

Depositing User: Meic Watkins
Date Deposited: 25 Jun 2015 12:29
Last Modified: 04 Nov 2015 16:03
URI: http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/24861

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Repository Staff Only: item control page

View Item View Item

University of Huddersfield, Queensgate, Huddersfield, HD1 3DH Copyright and Disclaimer All rights reserved ©